RI- R.I. gets extension on complying with sex offender law

9-22-2009 Rhode Island:

PROVIDENCE — Rhode Island is getting an extra year to comply with a federal law that would create a nationwide network of sex-offender registration and notification programs.

But despite the additional time, serious challenges still stand in the way of the state meeting the requirements of the law by July 2010, said Michael J. Healey, spokesman for the attorney general’s office. The state might even have to ask for another year’s reprieve. “We have a lot of work to do in a very short time.”

President George W. Bush signed the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act into law in 2006. Also known as the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act, it requires all 50 states and federally recognized Indian tribes to track people convicted of sex crimes, even those who completed their sentences decades ago, on a centralized computer registry. The state’s Web site would feature a photograph of and detailed information about each offender, including their home address, job locations and license plate numbers. It could be accessed by anyone.

States nationwide have been struggling with the cost and legal complications of implementing the law, so much so that the federal government extended the deadline for all to comply from July 2009 to 2010. In addition, it’s met more than 100 legal challenges.

States that fail to comply stand to lose 10 percent of the federal money they receive for sex-offender management programs and other law-enforcement initiatives. In Rhode Island, $80,000 to $500,000 could be at stake, Healey said.

Attorney General Patrick C. Lynch recently detailed the obstacles in a letter to Governor Carcieri, House Speaker William J. Murphy, Senate President M. Theresa Paiva Weed, the state police and the state Department of Corrections. In the coming weeks, he plans to convene a group of stakeholders to work on how to bring the state into compliance, Healey said.

Complying with the act will mean significant changes to the state’s sex-offender registration and notification laws. Under the federal act, for example, a sex offender’s risk level would be based on the offense committed.

Currently, a sex offender notification board assigns an offender’s level based on a predicted risk that he or she will reoffend, after a review of his or her criminal history, disciplinary record in prison and course of treatment, among other factors. The offender then has the right to appeal.

The lowest-risk category is Level I. The highest, Level III, requires a broad range of notifications to the public about where those people are living after serving their sentences. A Level II designation also requires community notification. An offender can appeal his or her level under the state system.

Another concern Lynch raised in his letter is that the law would require community notification for anyone over 14, including juveniles involved in a crime of violence or a crime against a child under 12. Minor offenders — even those whose cases go through closed Family Court trials — would have to update registration information three times a year for at least 25 years, perhaps for the rest of their lives. Currently, in Rhode Island, the community is alerted to the presence of juvenile sex offenders, but their information cannot be posted on the state’s Web site.

The law would also mandate that all sex offenders register with the state. State law now requires that anyone convicted of a sex crime since 1992 register, amounting to about 1,800 registered sex offenders. No one knows how many more offenders would be required to register under the retroactive provision, but Paula Kocon, coordinator of the Parole Board’s sex-offender community-notification unit, says she knows of at least 350.

Finding sex offenders who committed their crimes decades ago will mean police and state prosecutors must dig through old records. “How are we going to find these individuals?” Assistant Attorney General Bethany Mactaz said. “It is going to be very difficult.”

In addition, it broadens the crimes that require registration, lengthens the time offenders must register and increases the information states must provide to the public.

Despite the hurdles, Lynch backs the measure, saying it will streamline registration, eliminate the offender’s right to appeal his or her classification and save money, Healey said. “Ultimately, it would really do, we think, a better job of safeguarding the public.”

But his office notes that the law is facing legal challenges across the country.

No states have complied with the act, but the Department of Justice expects to announce that several jurisdictions have completely implemented it, possibly before the week’s end, said Susan Oliver, spokeswoman for the Department of Justice. ..Source.. by Katie Mulvaney, Journal Staff Writer